Many Happy Returns

by Mark SteynThursday NotebookNovember 30, 2017

https://www.steynonline.com/8284/many-happy-returns

The happy couple: HRH Prince Henry of Wales with the new Keeper of the Privy Purse

What is the correct attitude when a freeborn citizen of Britain's rebel colonies chooses to betray the revolution and marry into the reviled and rejected Royal house? The Washington Post knows how to parade on the reign:

Meghan Markle's U.S. Citizenship Could Cause Tax Headaches For British Royal Family

As the Post sees it, this isn't a story about an American marrying into the Royal Family, but about the Royal Family marrying into the IRS. Their wedding message to the Queen is: Don't look on it as losing a grandson, but as gaining an audit. And, unlike most recent Royal marriages, Lois Lerner is forever:

"U.S. citizens are subject to U.S. tax obligations regardless of their country of residence," Peter Spiro, a Temple University law professor and the author of "At Home in Two Countries: The Past and Future of Dual Citizenship," wrote in an email to The Washington Post. "A member of the royal family would be treated just like anyone else."

By contrast, if Prince Harry were to move to the United States to live with Markle, he would not be expected to file taxes in Britain. The United States' citizenship-based taxation system is unusual: Only Eritrea has a similar system. It's a relic of the Civil War and the Revenue Act of 1862, which called for the taxing of U.S. citizens abroad â€” in part to punish men who fled the country to avoid joining the military.

How much more satisfying to punish women who flee the country to join George III's garden parties. It would be too much to expect the Republican Congress to remove this anomalous affront. God forbid the US tax code should cease to be competitive with Eritrea.

2) The Muslim share of Europe's total population has been increasing steadily and will continue to grow in the coming decades...

3) Muslims are much younger and have more children than other Europeans.

I understand that the Pew Research Center is tediously respectable and that for some reason I am not. But longtime readers will note that I said as much over eleven years ago in a certain bestselling book, personally autographed copies of which are exclusively available at the SteynOnline bookstore and make a thoughtful Christmas present for the somnolent Pew Research demographer in your family. But it's beyond that really: the above "findings" are such a dreary statement of the obvious that to deny them you have to deny reality. All that has changed is that in 2006 it was still possible to reverse this trend, while a decade on it is increasingly likely that, for much of Europe (France, Sweden, Germany), we are past the point of no return. Tragic.

And, as the prosecution of Jayda Fransen by the successors to the Royal Ulster Constabulary and Mrs May's rebuke of Trump for retweeting Ms Fransen both confirm, the European political class attaches far greater priority to shooting the messenger than addressing the message.

~My former colleague Jonah Goldberg makes an interesting point with respect to last season's sex scandals versus this season's:

One thing has been nagging at me for a while and Patrick Ruffini put his finger on it this morning:

Why did this cascade start with Weinstein and not Roger Ailes? Was it because the Fox scandals were mostly about discrediting Fox? â€” Patrick Ruffini (@PatrickRuffini) November 29, 2017

When the allegations about Bill O'Reilly and Roger Ailes came out, the mainstream media had a field day. But there was no larger feeding frenzy. Last year it was a "Fox News" story, not a "societal problem" story. It took the Harvey Weinstein allegations to get the mainstream press to start asking uncomfortable questions about its own institutions. I can think of several reasons for this, but one that stands out is the tribalism of media itself.

In other words, the Ailes/O'Reilly scandals were an opportunity for the "mainstream" media to get Fox: the sex stuff was merely the Hitchcockian MacGuffin. When O'Reilly was fired in April, I recall Melissa Francis muttering on air about the stories "everyone knew" over at the other networks. But, if they ever gave a thought to it, Matt Lauer et al saw it through the classic tribal lens: "We're better men than those Fox guys, so by definition even our foibles are superior. By the way, can you have Building Services swing by and install a new under-the-desk door-lock button? I've worn the last one out."

On Fox the other day I remarked rather casually that the sex scandals were taking out liberal icons. When you point that out, liberals yell about Roy Moore. But hardly anyone outside Alabama had ever heard of Roy Moore, and, within the GOP establishment, he's reviled as a fringe kook to the point where McConnell & Co would rather lose the seat. Whereas, if you wanted to strike at the very heart of liberal self-satisfaction, you couldn't have plotted a better cast of fall-guys than this:

Harvey Weinstein, the producer of all those Oscar-bait chick-flicks with Meryl Streep and Judi Dench, so superior to all the shoot-'em-ups for the rubes;

Kevin Spacey, the star of everybody's favorite insider political drama;

Charlie Rose, the host of the oh-so-civilized PBS talk-show that's an antidote to all that ghastly right-wing yelling on Fox...

I was thinking to myself: hmm, Hollywood, TV drama, PBS... But what about radio? And then out of the blue yesterday came the latest firing:

Garrison Keillor, that nice man who reads poems to us very slowly every day on the way to work on NPR's "Morning Edition".

And even better, his defenestration came a day after he'd rushed to Al Franken's defense in The Washington Post.

Nancy Pelosi was wrong: Conyers is about the only non-icon in this story - he's just another lifelong political hack three decades past his sell-by date. Queen Mary famously said that when she died they would find Calais engraved on her heart. Well, Judi Dench had Harvey Weinstein's name tattooed on her butt, which is close enough. To a certain kind of upscale liberal, the Weinstein Company, "House of Cards", "The Charlie Rose Show", and "Prairie Home Companion" were all engraved on their hearts.

Rep. Raul Grijalva (D-Ariz.) found himself in the spotlight when The Washington Times reported Monday that he arranged for the payment of more than $48,000 in taxpayer funds toward a "severance package" â€” for a former staffer who threatened to slap him with a hostile workplace lawsuit back in 2015.

The publication revealed that an attorney charged with advising members of the House of Representatives on employment issues negotiated a $48,395 payout for the former senior staffer of Grijalva's that equaled five months of her salary. The employee received the settlement when she left the congressman's office after spending three months on the job in exchange for dropping her lawsuit, which alleged Grijalva frequently was drunk and created a hostile work environment.

Grijalva is a sleazy thug who used the power of his position to intimidate private citizens by arguing that, if you appear before his crappy committee, you've somehow put every jot and tittle of your life within his jurisdiction. But apparently, when he uses taxpayer funds to settle booze suits, that does not fall under any such public scrutiny. I regard him as a man unfit for office even by the low standards of Congress. As I testified two years ago to the United States Senate:

RaÃºl Grijalva, the Congressman from Arizona and Ranking Member of the House UnEnvironmental Activities Committee, earlier this year sent a letter to seven scientists, including professors Curry and Christy â€“ a quite disgraceful letter that no citizen-legislator in a representative parliament has any business sending to anybody, demanding among other things details of speaking fees, travel expenses, and email communications stretching back a decade. Commissar Grijalva presumed to be able to do this because these scientists had voluntarily testified before his committee, and thus, as he saw it, had submitted to his jurisdiction over every aspect of their lives. I hope this Senate sub-committee will distance itself from Commissar Grijalva' s deformed understanding of his role. But, in the event that, following my voluntary appearance here today, any Senator demands in five years' time to see my emails and know what hotel I stayed in in Cleveland or Copenhagen, I might as well give you my answer now: You ain't gettin' nuthin '.

~See you on the telly this evening. If you prefer me in non-visual form, tomorrow we'll be launching the second half of our Scott Fitzgerald double-bill - one of our bonus features for Mark Steyn Club members.

If you're thinking of giving the gift of Steyn this holiday season, we've introduced a special Christmas Gift Membership that lets you sign up a chum for the Steyn Club and then choose a personally autographed welcome gift for them - either one of two handsome hardback books or a couple of CDs. You'll find more details here - and scroll down to the foot of the order form for the choice of books/CDs.

Member Login

53 Reader Comments

Graham Fletcher • Dec 1, 2017 at 18:15

The recent spate of mostly Liberal falls-from-grace on the harassment and sexual assault front should provide some interesting unexpected elections soon. How many Dems on that list of millions of dollars in taxpayer settlement payouts will have to resign once the names are known? I suspect a disproportionate of grabby weasel liberals would be my guess.

David Elstrom • Dec 1, 2017 at 10:28

Miss Markle's IRS "problem" may not be as serious as The Washington Compost believes. She and her husband are taxed in Britain so the US will owe her foreign tax credits, plus she can utilize a special tax exemption for US expatriates. I assume she will not work after the marriage, but will be involved in the usual Royal Family public obligations. The alternative--renouncing US citizenship-- has more costly consequences. You see, we are hostages. As a precondition of the US "allowing" you to renounce your citizenship, you must pay an exit tax--calculated by pretending you sold everything you own and having the Feds tax your fictitious "gain" in real dollars. I'm confident that a battery of attorneys will help her avoid US government greed.

Mike • Nov 30, 2017 at 23:15

Well, fortunately the House of Windsor, per your column yesterday, is evidently part of the Cherokee Nation by virtue of Senator Warren, and as such, may be able to claim some sort of IRS exemption based on 19th century treaties.

P. Gao • Nov 30, 2017 at 21:07

Hilarious juxtaposition! Thanks for the laugh because we usually are crying. It's real. In the expat life, our simple tax filings make a stack of papers at least three inches thick. Dread the process every year. Things that take five minutes in the US sometimes actually required leaving the country we were in to go to another country to get documents notarized. That meant the need for a $3 or free service in the US cost us $600 in airfare, hotel and food plus the fee, provided we already had the visa for the other country. Just gah!!!! Plus, don't appreciate the US Embassy price-gouging fee schedules for "US Citizen Services" that charge $50 a page for notary stamp. Need three pages? $150 smackeroos. Why - when the US taxpayer is paying for all of it anyway and the State employees give the service to themselves for free? And then... after all is done, and everyone relaxes, a nasty letter with grim penalty threats from New York arrives to demand NY state taxes based on 78 hours of being bodily in New York state. gah!!!

Aussie Tax Fugitive • Nov 30, 2017 at 20:44

Hi Mark, unfortunately Australia has joined the US and Eritrea. During the reign of Kevin the Narcissist his Labor regime passed a law where now all Australians must lodge a tax return regress of where they live, meaning we are also now taxed on our world wide income. As Trump would say: Sad.

John Ward • Nov 30, 2017 at 18:12

How can a supposedly "free" country still maintain such arcane tax laws? It's not free by the way, it is subject to the neo-fascist rule of the left, never mind who sits in the white house.Your law makers should revoke this crass and stupid law. As for the royal couple, I wish them well but hope they have the sense to elope and avoid the revolting mass media.

David Sharp • Nov 30, 2017 at 16:46

Teresa May condemns DJT during a visit to Jordan, oh the irony, she criticises the Leader of democratic country in a country that just pays lip service to the idea of democracy. I speak as a person who lived there for several years. As a country it is slightly better than some of it's neighbours but only just. However she then drew attention to the spread of right wing extremism in the UK, quite right too, they kill and bomb indiscriminately don't they? One satisfying thing is that most comments on line at various news outlets support Trump. Re comments below from David Blair about the BBC, I fully agree, not sure what alternatives there are though - ITV, Channel 4 and Sky are just as bad.I get most of my news on line now.

Sol Cranfill David Sharp • Nov 30, 2017 at 20:03

I was rather impressed by the Hashemite kingdom by its ability to refrain from the slaughter of Jews and even to form cooperative work-factory exchanges in border cities. There are a lot of bedouin with bad teeth and, according to what I was told, there's a surprisingly high level of education there. It seemed that it went largely unused, due to an underdeveloped economy. I was surprised to have a gun pointed at me by the passenger in a passing car. It wasn't followed up by anything; just a recreational gun-pull. I've more of less thought of Jordan as a model neighbor for Israel. Could be (much) worse.

Clark Jerrell • Nov 30, 2017 at 16:26

Hate speech is the speech we disagree with, giving license to the "F**k the USA" Antifa crowd to come to physical blows with the MAGA crowd. I can't help but think we have come full circle back to revolutionary America, and remember that revolutionary Patriots and the American Tories of the day often came to blows over the issue of independence. Now Antifa are the revolutionaries of the day, while we staid white conservatives are the Tories. The world's gone upside down, indeed.

Concerning the upcoming demographic annihilation of Western Civilization in Europe, the inevitable civil war that will accompany it would oblige America, for the third time in 150 years (give or take a decade) to save democracy on that woeful continent, lest Islam surely win out. I wonder if America will have the wherewithal to do it again.

Paul Harmon Clark Jerrell • Nov 30, 2017 at 18:21

About that war on the continent and America being called in to save it... good point. Perhaps we'll let the Russians do it this time...

Carol Ward Paul Harmon • Dec 2, 2017 at 10:52

I spent a lot of time in Hungary and Austria last year.... Lake Balaton is filling with expat Germans who are adding political muscle to the 'resistance' in Budapest and Warsaw.

the Roma have left for a higher paycheck in France and Germany.... so Budapest now resembles Cherry Creek Denver .... no gypsies in the parks - everyone in cargo shorts, ball caps and University T's.

It looked like an Auburn Football crowd.... up and down the leafy streets and parks.

Eastern Europe will be the line in the sand...... Just like last time... Romania is also enjoying a respite from the Gypsie and Muslim occupation..... Timisoara is delightful now..... Even Bulgaria is enjoying a renaissance.

Sol Cranfill • Nov 30, 2017 at 15:14

If you, like me, wonder how a nation that experienced nightly bombardments and nearly lost WWII didn't pick up on the clue that civilizations can end, consider that in surveys, 1 in 5 Britons thought Sherlock Holmes was a real person and 1 in 5 British teens thought Churchill wasn't.

David Kelley-Wood • Nov 30, 2017 at 14:19

From your testimony to the U.S. Senate: "You ain't gettin' nuthin '"

Obviously, you did that for emphasis, but if anyone is deserving of the double negative, it's the U.S. Senate.

Fan • Nov 30, 2017 at 14:16

I am appalled at Theresa May's 'rebuke' of Trump's re-tweeting. She doesn't get it. Nor do most of the political class around the world. I note that the BBC is being lambasted for having Ann Coulter on yesterday. The BBC is also continuing to state that Trump 'misattributed' the rise in the UK's crime figures to Islamic terrorism. When you drill into the statistics, Trump was absolutely correct - in every detail. A tribal media indeed! :-(

Keep plugging on Mark, for freedom of speech. It remains the most important aspect of a free and democratic society!

Sol Cranfill • Nov 30, 2017 at 14:13

Pretty sure Mark's getting a show just by process of elimination.

Sol Cranfill Sol Cranfill • Nov 30, 2017 at 18:14

And Process of Illumination wouldn't be a bad name for it.

Sol Cranfill Sol Cranfill • Nov 30, 2017 at 18:45

And there's an opening at Fox! Geraldo allegedly Bill Cosbyed Bette Midler. It's been a bad week for moustaches.

John Koskinen had access to all Trump's unreleased tax returns. Plot thickens or crazy right winger ?

David from Florida Doug Lauder • Nov 30, 2017 at 21:44

J. Edgar Koskinen turned out to be far more cunning than the average Democrat hack: "Don't worry, President Trump, to make certain your enemies won't leak your tax returns, I've transferred all of them to a secure database that only my lawyer and I can access. Now, about my retirement bonus....".

Sol Cranfill • Nov 30, 2017 at 13:47

The wicker basket shields (seriously) that were part of the riot gear at a demonstration I saw against the implementation of the Maastricht treaty in Brussels 20 years ago should've been a clue about how European citizens would be defended from this madness. Later in Brussels I saw a man get whisked in the dark of night horizontally into a doorway and it seem like something out of the Gulag Archipelago and now it's reality in Belfast.

Jennifer • Nov 30, 2017 at 13:05

I'm actually really worried about the head in the sand approach of blocking uncomfortable information - this situation is something I have watched escalate in the alt press and is still dismissed in mainstream: https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/11459/germany-migrants-attack-police

The massive movement of people reminded me of my family's games of Risk - total domination of little sisters was always inevitable outcome - just how many hours of play would it take to achieve and would little sisters last to the final rolls of dice or bail?

David Blair • Nov 30, 2017 at 13:04

In respect of the Trump tweets, watch this impartial news report from the taxpayer-funded BBC, advising UK viewers how best to thwart Donald Trump in his attempts to draw attention to the effect of importing Muslim culture. Have a look from 14m50s into the programme, which is when I tuned in last night and started shouting far-right hate slogans at Evan Davies through my TV screen.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b09hbp69/newsnight-29112017#

If you think you can discern what Evan Davies' personal views are through comments such as, "I just wonder if rationalising with the guy [President Trump] is ever going to have any effect" well you're clearly wrong, because the BBC charter states:

"The public purposes of the BBC are ... to provide news and information to help people understand and
engage with the world around them: the BBC should provide duly accurate and IMPARTIAL NEWS, current affairs and factual programming to build people's understanding of all parts of the United Kingdom and of the Wider world...It should offer a range and depth of analysis and content not widely available from other United Kingdom news providers, using the highest calibre presenters and journalists, and CHAMPIONING FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION, so that all audiences can engage fully with major local, regional, national, United Kingdom and global issues and participate in the democratic process, at all levels, as active and informed citizens."

Absolutely no discussion about the accuracy of the videos or the opportunity for someone to put a contrary view, just a blanket categorisation of their content as "far-right hate". So if a Muslim does the Allahu Akbar routine we all know so well, anyone drawing attention to the fact to instil a determination to counter it is treated on a par with someone who draws attention to it with approval. Imagine a rugby match where the opposition are playing dirty and have broken the legs of two of your team under a lax referee. At half-time, the captain of the team tries to psyche the team up and playing on the edge. The coach uses his half-time dismissing the captain and conducting an investigation to see if the other players were sympathetic to the captain. I wouldn't want to play for any team Theresa May was coaching.

Other reports I have read do question the accuracy of the 3 videos and seem to conclude that one is dubious implying it had been faked by anti-Muslim actors (the left wing journalists were very quick to draw that conclusion with none of the usual "allegedly" and "we can't comment at this stage" caveats) and that the other two are illegitimate because they are a few years old and show the actions of radical Islamists in Syria and Egypt, it somehow doesn't support President Trump's thesis that the West needs to do something about radical Islam. I have to say, if one of them is a staged video stunt for anti-Muslim purposes, I'm disappointed at the lack of rigour in President Trump's tweeting, it's not as if there is no genuine material out there and being sloppy undermines the point he is making. Nonetheless, for the BBC to have a discussion that doesn't even address the issue of the accuracy of the posts and just gets down to the brass tacks of, "How can we make the elected President of the US less effective in pursuing his agenda?" is the biggest issue of all.

It is sadly just one out of thousands of illustrations of the stampede of the left-dominated social elites towards labelling in preference to analysis, but it seems a new low in the BBC's dismantling of its pretence that it disguises its highly left-wing political agenda. For the Conservative Party to be providing the backing-chorus is deeply depressing - anyone who thought that Baroness Warsi was the totem of the Fifth Column within the party has to recognise that the cancer is critical and another party has to take its place.

I thought Davies couldn't shock me any more with his complete disregard for the BBC Charter, but the guy has done it again. He's not stupid, he knows what he's doing, but the question is, what should we do about it? If we complain to the BBC, he probably expects it and knows that his bosses will reject the complaints as hate speech, but if we do nothing, we normalise his behaviour. I asked my old pal Adolf Hitler what some good advice would be for dealing with Davis and he said, "Vell you know, I just zink it vould be super-kool if Davis vould spend a vew nights in von of mein Kamps and zat vay, he'd see vhat ve're tryink to achieve here. You know, ve're really tryink to change zinks, and zese uninformed komments just have some of the guar... zorry, Kamp attendants, holding zeir heads in zeir hands at all the good work he is un-doing vizth a zingle TV program. It juzt zeems to konfirm everyzink zat the people who call him a puppet for ze anti-democratischeestablishmentkonzensus are zayink." I then told Adolf that he was a very reasonable man, I hoped that he succeeded, and that if he managed to get Davis to take a shower while he was there, we would all be very interested to be kept up-to-date. I'm expecting to be able to air the interview as a slot on the News at 10, so keep your eyes peeled.

Just in case the police are monitoring this hate website, I would like to clarify that I am not attempting to equate the Conservative politician with Adolf Hitler, I'm trying to point out that an impartial interviewer should never give a politician such an easy ride.

Jennifer • Nov 30, 2017 at 12:53

It's not a question of respectable in the current political scene it seems to be an us them tribalism - you are conservative and liberals seem to have a block everyone who isn't an us policy. In liberal land there doesn't seem to be any tolerance - odd. I prefer to listen to a variety of opinions as it broadens perspective and understanding. Liberal think they are woke but if real issues are being blocked then it is woke with only one eye open. When I share information it is not always my opinion that I'm sharing, but reporting on the state of part of the union, so to speak.

The hockey stick book is very important but seems to be brushed under the rug, dismissed, and the expense of big money legal teams is something to be concerned about. I had not been aware of the extent of the issue as I had been focused on other things and didn't look into the Climategate information at all. It makes much more sense now how the climate denial grew so large. It wasn't just Exxon who lied. the bad graph gave too much evidence of fraud all along and would have helped fuel the denial. I just noticed the Climate Change The facts blurb in the side bar and am glad to see it. People like solutions is what I've found, don't just present the problem but try to offer a solution or next step.

I've looked into defamation/libel/slander information for my own needs as I've written a negative book review that got a lot of negative attention - and then was proven to be legitimate concern. Take legal issues seriously is a precaution I would encourage, and public opinion can make a difference even though a jury is supposed to be unaware of a case. I've problems with lack of privacy and public opinion can lead to dangerous reactions by some individuals.

I enjoy your humorous approach Mr. Steyn, but have also felt hurt by some of the unkind digs at people or historical figures. The Broadway musical references are a bonus and your club members can add insight, I hope the legal case works out smoothly, eventually.

Randy Stafford Jennifer • Nov 30, 2017 at 20:28

Jennifer,

Was it a review of a fiction book or non-fiction book that got you into trouble?

Asking, as they say, for a friend.

Sol Cranfill • Nov 30, 2017 at 12:45

The video of Matt Lauer on the Today Show that aired on Tucker Carlson's show last night is chilling. It gives a glimpse into evil that masquerades as good. It aired in Kansas when the brief morning switch to local programming never happened and evil impulses are seen racing through Lauer's face as he looks like he's about to hiss like a wild ocelot, bare his fangs and sink them into the assistant's neck. Extremely disturbing that a very genial newsman can instantly turn into a predator. That and the Weinstein audio of him badgering the model nonstop to get into his hotel room gave a rare direct look into how terrifying everyday predators are to women, and what happened to Bill Clinton's victims. Yet, this was the G-rated version of an R-rated horror. Ronan Farrow's piece that Lauer's network passed on was published in early October. I can't think of one arrest.

siberianmo Sol Cranfill • Nov 30, 2017 at 13:55

Sol,

I too focused on the "look" Lauer displayed when thought to be off-camera; no doubt this guy was up to no good.

What do any of us in the "great unwashed" really know about these self-appointed celebrities? I mean, really know? This guy's zipper-fly most probably was connected to the under-the-desk-door-lock- button.

Tom in Missouri

Sol Cranfill siberianmo • Nov 30, 2017 at 15:39

We know that feminism is a thinly veiled lie that distracts and conceals and provides cover for criminal gangs of celebrities affiliated with Bill Clinton and legitimized by him nationally, who have been using their positions to leverage their power into wanton abuse of subordinates. Unless the rule of law is reapplied, it will adapt to a new set of rules and continue.

siberianmo Sol Cranfill • Dec 1, 2017 at 13:59

Sol,

Good point.

Unfortunately, we seem to have great difficulty in applying the "rule of law" in these times. You recall: It depends of what the definition of "is" is.

Chagrin without a grin.

Tom in Missouri

Paul Harmon • Nov 30, 2017 at 12:41

Why are the recent revelations so heavily loaded to the left?

1.) The leftist press has been protecting its own for decades (think Clintons, Teddy Kennedy, etc) while excoriating hypocritical conservatives at every possible opportunity. The left side of the closet is exploding with bad news, but the right side is relatively empty. A more balanced news room would have prevented this judgement day...

2.) There really is a difference between leftist/atheistic notions of human chattel fit only to serve the state and those in power, and conservative ideas of man created in God's image and therefore intrinsically worthy of love and respect: https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/11/28/no-republicans-arent-hypocrites-on-family-values-215873

I think it is a combination...

Robert Bridges • Nov 30, 2017 at 12:38

At least Wallis Simpson (inadvertently) saved England from a future of "English as a second language" to German. As for the future with Arabic... I am not certain since Harry is no longer a "spare" heir.

Jim Stratton • Nov 30, 2017 at 12:36

Rep. Conyers has been on my list since 1983 when he was one of two U S Congressmen who voted against a resolution condemning the USSR for shooting down Korean flight 007 (with my congressman aboard). Once a left wing jerk, always....

siberianmo Jim Stratton • Nov 30, 2017 at 14:13

Jim,

Conyers, in my not-so-humble-oh-pin-yun is a moron, hardly the "icon" dear Nancy conferred on him.

As for that Congressional resolution you mentioned, my research revealed it passed the house 416-0; meaning no one voted against it - but rather abstained. Conyers was amongst the latter group.

What is needed and needed straight-away are term limits for all in Congress. This notion that we the voters have that ability at election time is utter nonsense. Political districts in this country will keep sending back inept idiots just as long as there are inept idiots.

Just my 2-cents.

Tom in Missouri

Sol Cranfill siberianmo • Nov 30, 2017 at 20:27

Aside from past US Supreme Court rulings, If term limits worked, I would be in agreement with you. In California, things have gotten far, far worse under term limits. It would require a lot of space to explain it. The shorthand is that, although there are some benefits to it, like scraping off stubborn barnacles from the ship of state, legislators can go wild knowing they won't be around to answer for repercussions.

Jim Stratton siberianmo • Nov 30, 2017 at 22:37

You are right. Actually, with the courage of our 44th president, they voted "present". Otherwise 416 to 0. Never has a number more accurately described a person than "0", for Rep Conyers.

siberianmo Sol Cranfill • Dec 1, 2017 at 11:27

Sol,

Term-limits "work" in my state and they certainly have for U.S. Presidents since FDR.

California is truly unto itself; I would not use The Republic of California as a measure; unless one is measuring opposition.

I want to see an alternative to what we are laboring under with these "do nothing Congresses." To do nothing is to perpetuate the sin; as I see it.

Barnacles are far easier to remove than the likes of Conyers, et al.

Tom in Missouri

siberianmo Jim Stratton • Dec 1, 2017 at 11:29

Jim,

Not so much about being "right" as absolutely fed-up with the ilk of Conyers and all of the spineless representatives of the people who cannot decide between "Yay or Nay." Voting "present" is a non-vote made very popular in Illinois by one Barack Obama, State Senator.

Tom in Missouri

Graeme Thompson • Nov 30, 2017 at 12:13

"And, as the prosecution of Jayda Fransen by the successors to the Royal Ulster Constabulary and Mrs May's rebuke of Trump for retweeting Ms Fransen both confirm, the European political class attaches far greater priority to shooting the messenger than addressing the message."

Unless you think 'Britain First' is defending British democracy against jihad and is worth voting for, how could it be anything but a problem that POTUS retweets propaganda from a party founded by ex-BNP members? Giving an implicit endorsement whether intended or not to a party that fights jihad to enable fascism should be a problem in any democrat's book. Do you think the times are so desperate that we should make common cause with the far right to defend jihad? It's alarming that Geert Wilders seems to think so in aligning himself with Marine Le Pen. In the Europe-wide civil war that is coming between the Islamist/Correctnick axis and the far right and its allies of convenience, once they've marked out their turf they'll join forces to come after Jews and Christians. I think you owe it to members where you stand on making common cause with the far right.

Mark replies:

With respect, I think you're looking at things the wrong way. It is not necessary to be "making common cause" with anyone to find her arrest for giving a speech disturbing - particularly when all kinds of other speeches by incendiary imams and the like discombobulate the authorities not a whit. The British state is teaching the lesson that if you know what's good for you you won't utter a peep about Islam. By the time the Sharia crowd takes over, you won't notice the difference.

And just to underline that: it's a sign of how degraded the free-speech business has become in the UK that a theoretical commitment to Ms Fransen's right to give a speech without facing arrest should be assumed to be some sort of "support" for her party. The point of free speech is to protecr the speech you hate.

As to "making common cause with the far right", no, I'm not. It should not be "far right" to recognize that mass Muslim immigration is transformative, and thus imprudent. No Tory prime minister pre-Major would have thought otherwise. But it has now become unsayable. And, as I've often observed, if the respectable political parties are not allowed to discuss certain subjects, eventually the public will turn to unrespectable ones. Which is how Marine LePen, whether or not she is fascist, wound up in the final round of the Presidential election. And Donald Trump, come to that. Brexit should have taught that lesson, if nothing else.

All of which is to say: Mature societies have to be able to prioritize. What is the bigger threat to Europe's future? Jayda Fransen's speeches? Trump's tweets? BNP nutters? Or a surging self-segregating unassimilated population with no serious commitment to free speech, freedom of religion, or most of the other distinguishing features of a pluralist society?

Graeme Thompson Graeme Thompson • Nov 30, 2017 at 13:49

Mr Steyn, the issue I was addressing is that it's quite right that the President of the United States retweeting links from a far right organisation is a major issue. I have no idea if the decrowned Ulster peelers have legitimate grounds to bring charges against Miss Fransen for her Belfast speech or not. Judging from the British State's treatment of Tommy Robinson, I would imagine not, and it's utterly deplorable if that's the case. If you have time to answer the point I was actually making I'd be grateful.

Ian Cory Graeme Thompson • Nov 30, 2017 at 14:16

"The point of free speech is to protect the speech you hate."

Mark, you are way out of touch with the leftist zeitgeist. The speech you hate is "hate speech", i.e. a criminal offence rendering you subject to demonisation, (not least by organs like the BBC), death threats, imprisonment, sequestration of assets, burial alive, you name it. This is an unprecedented "crime" within supposed democracies founded upon the rule of law, particularly Common Law. It seems to be an entirely 21st century leftist criterion that its not a matter of intent which defines a crime, but one solely of interpretation by the listener, i.e. the self-appointed (leftist, snowflake, Islamic idealogue, whatever) "victim". Oh very heaven it is to be alive at this hour!!

siberianmo Ian Cory • Nov 30, 2017 at 14:29

Ian,

I am 100% in concurrence with your contention that the speech (we) hate is "hate speech."

A few decades back I recall walking with 2 of my children after a baseball game. There was a character standing not far from the ball park with a T-shirt emblazoned with "F- - k the USA" on it.

We had words and it took a couple (as in two) local cops to keep me from ripping it along with his scruffy head from his body. His right? My sweet patoot - that ceases when he directs his venom my way; which he did.

Nothing came of it - legally speaking - and to this day I believe my 2 sons got the message.

Tom in Missouri

Ian Cory siberianmo • Nov 30, 2017 at 15:09

Tom.

You clearly accorded this guy's opinion (as projected via his T-shirt slogan) great significance. Did you know him? Should you care what he had on his T-shirt? Is he someone who you think is a threat to you? Clearly not as you were prepared to confront him, violently it seems from your account viz the two local cops. Isn't this exactly the issue with free speech the article above addresses?

Andrew A Graeme Thompson • Nov 30, 2017 at 17:56

By re-tweeting BNP propaganda, Trump emasculates the politically-correct censors who decide what is hate speech and what is not. What exactly have the hate-speech censors done to win Trump's respect for protecting Jews and Christians from fascists and Islamists?

Sol Cranfill Graeme Thompson • Nov 30, 2017 at 20:46

Perhaps the application of the label "far right" is overly wide and too dismissive?

Sol Cranfill Graeme Thompson • Dec 1, 2017 at 00:02

I think you're assigning too much weight to this little tweet. It's not even a chirp. It's a tweet. Not everything is 1,2, Hitler. You've got to consider everything else surrounding it to put it into its proper perspective, which I thought Mark did nicely.

siberianmo Ian Cory • Dec 1, 2017 at 10:49

Ian,

Given that in this conversation, I was the only one present at the "scene." What you and perhaps others have to opine is just that.

I can guarantee that this fellow was attracting the attention he wanted simply by stationing himself in a location where thousands of baseball fans were departing the stadium. I gave him nothing other than what I would give to anyone - even you, perhaps - displaying an insult to my country of which I am an honored citizen and military vet.

The two policeman were in the process of handcuffing him for disturbing the peace as I departed the scene.

Free speech in the scenario I presented is an abridgment of its intent and what this jerk did was to ensure that I knew he was just that - a jerk.

Appreciate your 2-cents, but I'm not buying it.

Tom in Missouri

Jayne Hunt • Nov 30, 2017 at 11:52

Disclaimer: I am a cynic. This whole harassment thing is a joke. Not in the sense that most of the accusations are not true but that there is shock and surprise by the talking heads. You can't tell me that this stuff has not been known for decades by everyone across the board. The mail room guys and the clean up crews probably have enough info to fill several sets of encyclopedias. This isn't a scandal, it's a lifestyle. There has been a tacit agreement by them all to cover for each other. Cokie Roberts said, women all knew not to get on an elevator alone with John Conyers. Matt Lauer interviewing Bill O'Reilly about his "problems" at Fox ( they were prepping for an SNL skit), and so on.They are millionaire con men and their associates are complicit in this scam.
Lying skills should be offered as one of the Fine Arts at Harvard, et al.One can hope they will all become irrelevant and prosecuted.But that won't happen, in a few weeks it will be business as usual. Isis will blow up something, a call for gun control, Democrats will call Republicans sleaze bags, and Maxine Waters will shrill "impeach fawty-five"!

siberianmo Jayne Hunt • Nov 30, 2017 at 12:24

Jayne,

Most accurate appraisal read thus far on the subject . . . this one is a keeper.

Tom in Missouri

BallBounces in Charlottetown • Nov 30, 2017 at 11:08

The mainstream press views Fox as akin to a backwater blog on steroids.

Jamie Marsh • Nov 30, 2017 at 10:59

One of things I find interesting about the Roy Moore situation is that he was a good ole boy, well-connected Dem, when he was apparently prowling the mall, dating teens, etc. Does that matter now, maybe not, but if you're keeping score at home this has primarily been a democrat/liberal scandal as of late, and the one token Republican was just another corrupt Democrat when the abuse is alleged to have taken place.

Scot Albrecht • Nov 30, 2017 at 10:47

Watching the Lauer implosion on the Today show yesterday, I thought of the best replacement for Matt Lauer - Mark Steyn. I would request not to take over Matt's office though.

Jayne Hunt Scot Albrecht • Nov 30, 2017 at 12:04

It's gonna take a long time to disinfect Lauer's office. I would suggest put yellow tape around it and call it a danger zone and stay the heck away!